Here are my notes from the first hour of the hearing; I could not stay for the whole meeting.

I would like to note that only three members of the WRA board attended this meeting. I know people have conflicts, but when you are talking about the potential of property taking by eminent domain, it would have been nice to have a full board in attendance. I’ll link here to any articles I see about the meeting.

WRA staff and BSC group will give presentation, explanation of finances of plan

Public comment

Timeline, introduced by Pedone: City Council directed CM O’Brien to have WRA to start embarking on urban renewal plan. Up to $500k for this exercise. In 2014, bids through RFP for consultant to assist in putting the plan together. Community Advisory Committee, headed by John Brissette, had 10 meetings over the course of 8 months, received feedback from those in the zone. City Council passed request to include the Wyman-Gordon site.

Shortly after that, CAC expanded to include some of Southbridge Street.

At end of meeting, will take a vote to move this plan forward. But this is not the end of the process.

WRA meeting a week from tomorrow (Friday the 13th) to discuss topics brought up at this forum. Input greatly appreciated.

Ask to limit comments to three minutes, submit written testimony.

Mayor Petty speaks. Thanks everyone for their hard work. Half a billion invested in downtown, another step in making this a better city.

Pedone continues to talk about economic growth in the city. This plan will tie it all together. They are completely open to making revisions to the plan.

CM Augustus, opening comments: thanks everyone for their time and effort. Some of us who live here do not appreciate the scale of changes that have happened over the past 20 and esp past 10 years. Lot of property owners identified who are good people who care about the city but may not be able to afford changes. Eminent domain is a scary thought, but isn’t the first goal of this plan. Really is the last resort. Brings attention to these properties.

Augustus, continued: Advocates people ratting on their neighbors who have property in disrepair. Downtown analogous to that situation.

(My older son notes that these comments have now lasted longer than three minutes.)

Rep Keefe: Excited to hear what folks have in mind tonight. When we talk about urban renewal, a bit of PTSD. Wants to hear more about the public process for feedback. This is transformational – less about destruction and more about renovation and investment.

Pedone: phrase urban renewal is scary, so (1) this authority has gone out of its way to make sure everything is public, (2) this space overlooks successful urban renewal space. (By this he means the hospital.)

Gary declines to speak: “This is the public’s night.”

Mike Trainor now begins to go through a PowerPoint overview of the plan, Heather Gould and Jef Fasser (BSC) will both speak later.

Why Urban Revitalization?

To be a stronger, more vibrant downtown. Economic engine for the whole region. Strategy is to approach properties where private sector has not invested in them. “These are the tough ones.” 24 properties plus first floor of Denholm’s.

Code violations, out of date code, brownfields vacant for 20 years, upper floors vacant, obsolete buildings private sector not willing to invest in. Bring confidence to existing property owners, those who want to invest in Worcester.

Urban Renewal Plan by law has a 20 year shelf life.

MedCity: taxes: $27,000 in 1993, $5million in 2016. What we spent and what has been returned has been a 30% return on investment

Introduces MGL about urban renewal. Currently 26 active, approved plans in the Commonwealth, 18 of those are in Gateway Cities.

One active urban renewal plan in Worcester is Union Station. They were able to use land in that area to the Homewood Suites hotel.

Heather Gould of Economic Development to discuss the DIF District.

This project is a great example of successful public/private urban renewal partnership. Two different property owners, two different developers (Mercantile Center, City Square proper). City has spent $90 mill for demo of mall, street network, site prep, rekindling the urban fabric that once existed. 550 space underground parking garage, will make parking more accessible. Approximately $300 million in both projects in private investments. Up to 370 units of market rate housing, AC Marriott hotel.

They are basing this on the Theater District Master Plan.

Transformative Development Initiative from MassDevelopment. Worcester was chosen – focus is on Theater District. Aim is to make the district a bustling hub of activity, where people want to go after work. This is its own initiative but fits into Theater District Master Plan.

Jef Fasser of BSC Group – walkthrough of the plan.

Looking at improving gateways into the downtown, aesthetics, building stock.

12 & 22 Front Street (Mid Town Mall). There are a lot of small businesses in that building, they don’t want to chase small businesses out.

17 Pleasant Street (former Olympia Theater). It would be a challenge to turn around a large space like the theater and pay back the investment needed to take. Recommendation is to demo.

300 Southbridge Street, Miss Worcester Diner and large building (beautiful but in tough shape).

4 Quinsigamond Ave (flea market, tattoo).

346 Southbridge Street (Hurricane Betty’s)

I’ve found that “prime development area” = “evict longtime taxpayers”

City has grant to pay for improvements on Quinsig Ave and Main Street. They want to tie all this in to plans.

Pedestrian level improvements – sidewalks, lighting, safety, make the alleyways a place for pedestrians to walk.

Total project cost: $104 million. Of this, $82 million would be needed. They have identified potential funding sources.

Public comment period:

Recognizes Konnie Lukes and Sarai Rivera

John Brissette: asks the others who served to stand. Process started in Fall 2014 comprised of a group of stakeholders. Public forum at Crompton Collective in Feb 2015. Another public hearing at City Hall. Talked a lot about small businesses.

Jill Dagilis: they worked really hard to listen. She is a city resident and property owner, WCAC executive director. She is a huge fan of Worcester. Believes this is a good plan, vibrant development and revitalization is good for all of us.

Frank Carroll: congratulates CM on his explanation of what is going on with redevelopment program. Glad Tim Murray was mentioned as well. Has been in business on Main Street for 28 years. (He reads some remarks which had been discouraged. Hey, some of us need notes!) He remembers the opposition to this building (DCU Center). We need private enterprise in order to keep our taxes down.

Non-profits don’t pay taxes, private enterprise pays taxes. Discusses how out-of-town property owners need to do more than just collect rent. Other property owners should step up to the plate and not expect the city government to pay for the improvements.

Tim Murray of the Chamber of Commerce: if every property owner were like Frank Carroll, we wouldn’t need to be here.

Chronic problem properties for a long time have been targeted by this plan.

If we are going to leverage the public and private partnerships, we need to address these properties. About engaging property owners, taking is a last resort. Put primacy on rehabilitation.

Troy Siebels: success of his buildings is dependent on his plan. Concerned that it does not go far enough. There are other properties that might require more work, plan just addresses low-hanging fruit. Asked if there are other properties: yes, in the immediate 500 block, the Denholm Building first floor most critical.

Deb Packard: is this a static plan? Can areas/buildings be added? Preservation Worcester understands that not every building can or should be saved. They are concerned about demolishing two historical theaters in the downtown (Capitol/Paris Cinema: has heard it’s in bad shape)

Packard, continued: in terms of demolition delay ordinance, is that still in place for a year?

Very concerned about Olympia Theater. She was in the theater less than a month ago. She is reminded of what people said about the Hanover Theater ten years ago.

Putting her library hat, Pres of the Library Board. They are very enthusiastic about opening the front door. However, parking is a concern, patrons have children, strollers, elderly, we might lose them, important downtown institution.

Trainor: idea of any development is longterm thought process. Wants to increase parking availability. They will not leave the library with less parking.

Eighty percent of everything ever built in America has been built in the last fifty years, and most of it is depressing, brutal, ugly, unhealthy, and spiritually degrading — the jive-plastic commuter tract home wastelands, the Potemkin village shopping plazas with their vast parking lagoons, the Lego-block hotel complexes, the “gourmet mansardic” junk-food joints, the Orwellian office “parks” featuring buildings sheathed in the same reflective glass as the sunglasses worn by chain-gang guards, the particle-board garden apartments rising up in every meadow and cornfield, the freeway loops around every big and little city with their clusters of discount merchandise marts, the whole destructive, wasteful, toxic, agoraphobia-inducing spectacle that politicians proudly call “growth.”

Before I continue on an extended rant about Worcester and downtown development, I’d like to step back and talk about how and why our downtown got to be what is it today. Some of you aren’t originally from Worcester, and the background might be helpful even for those who are.

Post-WWII Urban Renewal

We don’t often think of Worcester being on the bleeding edge of anything, but in the late 1950s through early 1970s, Worcester was at the forefront of the post-World War II wave of urban renewal.

At a very high level, urban renewal as Worcester saw it consisted of a reaction to fears that downtown Worcester was dying, and that the only way to save it was to make it as suburban as possible. The car was king, and much of the development was geared towards the convenience of those arriving by car.

For those like me, born after the mall was installed, it’s nearly impossible to imagine what downtown Worcester was like. There was no I-290 bisecting the city and the downtown. Traffic could flow from Kelley Square to Madison Street. There was dense housing and businesses all the way from Main Street right up to Union Station. There were factory buildings where the hospital now sits. There was no brutalist post office or police station. Worcester was built at a human scale.

While the Galleria mall is usually what first comes to mind when thinking about Worcester’s post-war urban renewal, it was actually the centerpiece of a much larger project that transformed the downtown.

Before the Galleria was even a twinkle in Francis McGrath’s eye, the next two blocks over were being transformed in the first round of a major downtown project.

The Salem Square Redevelopment Project was able to accomplish many things: two major anchor sites in the WPL and YWCA; hundreds of parking spots in the McGrath lot; freeing up space at Pearl-Elm for a multistory parking garage.

At the same time, Madison Place was being constructed, with a hotel at one end and a large, suburban-style plaza with plenty of parking for customers at the other.

As you can see, development centered on the needs of cars to the exclusion of beauty and with little consideration for pedestrians. Development was also predicated on a myth that these areas were “blighted” and that tearing down blocks of businesses, apartments, shops, and churches would bring about economic renewal.

The “progress” continued in full force: the large glass tower (with parking garage); the reflecting pool on the Common (with under-Common parking, which I suppose was an improvement on the previous incarnation, which saw a small parking lot next to City Hall); the fortress-like police station; the destruction of whole neighborhoods in the wake of I-290; McGrath and Worcester Center Boulevards, perfect for moving vehicles and little else; culminating in the Worcester Galleria, with the Largest Parking Garage in the World!

By the time the Galleria was constructed, the tide of urban planning ideas was turning back to livable, walkable urban centers (like the Downtown Mall in Charlottesville). But Worcester had invested too much in a bigger-is-better, car-driven vision — and on it continued: to the Centrum; to Medical City; to more parking garages and surface lots.

But things are different this time!

It’s difficult for many longtime Worcesterites to trust that Worcester Urban Renewal 2.0 will correct the wrongs of the past 50 years.

Some of the damage is long term: I-290 is here to stay, and the DCU Center and St. Vincent’s Hospital aren’t likely to move.

But, even ignoring the things we can’t change, we don’t usually leverage what we can change into the best and highest use of land and existing buildings.

When we continue to see buildings like the St. V’s Cancer Center and the Unum Building — both with minimal interest for pedestrians, adding nothing to street-level activity — constructed in key downtown lots, it gives no confidence that future construction will be any better.

The WRA has not had a winning track record when it comes to downtown Worcester. It was the key driver of the destruction of the blocks east of City Hall, the demolition of neighborhoods for I-290, and Medical City (now St. Vincent’s Hospital). While it can be credited with the successful renovation of Union Station, that station still lacks a convenient place for passenger pick-up and drop-off nearly 20 years after its rehab, and has only recently become the intermodal hub it was intended to be.

When the destruction of downtown was in full swing, residents of Worcester were assured that the Galleria would bring in loads of visitors who would be more than willing to exit the mall to shop at existing downtown businesses. As we know too well, that didn’t happen and the mall was a death knell for many businesses that had escaped the earlier wrecking ball. Then as now, we are unwilling to believe that businesses are thriving in an obviously “blighted” area and to learn from their successes.

I do not wish to lay all of the blame on the WRA, as there is plenty to go around.

Worcester’s insularity — an unwillingness to trust outsiders who actually know what they are talking about, and the promotion of the in-crowd to the exclusion of the deserving — is a tradition we proudly continue.

We are more than willing to trust certain connected property owners over others who aren’t in the club.

That’s why the Mid Town Mall is continually castigated, while the Krock-owned properties — including the obscene surface lot across the street from the courthouse — mostly escape scrutiny.

That’s why the Paris Cinema building has been boarded up for years. It’s now owned by the same company that covered up a really interesting building and turned it into the beige Portland Street Lofts. They’re going to tear the Paris Cinema down. They might replace it with a small grassy area with pop-up restaurant offerings. But first — they’re going to turn it into a parking lot! ON THE GRID!

Nobody wakes up in the morning and asks themselves how badly they can screw up downtown Worcester.

We’ve lost so much that we can never get back. We’ve lost big brick factory buildings that could have served as loft, office, or retail space. We’ve replaced structures made for people with structures made for cars. We cannot lose another piece of our heritage. We can’t afford another misstep.

When we erect a building that’s inappropriate for a site, that space is lost to us for decades.

When we demolish a downtown building, we could be knocking out a tooth that can’t be Lumineered back into existence.

The developments in CitySquare to date don’t reflect an understanding of where we came from and don’t inspire confidence about where we’re going.

It’s not too late to look back at our mistakes and correct what we can, but if citizens fail to get involved, the “renewal” crowd will blindly visit us with new and improved mistakes with which we’ll live for decades.

For the few of you who didn’t already know, Massachusetts will hold its presidential primaries this coming Tuesday. This is an event that used to only be open to those registered in a state-recognized party, or to those who are “unenrolled” voters. Voters in the latter group could show up and request a ballot from any of the recognized parties, cast a vote in that primary, and then go back to being unenrolled as they checked out at the end of the process.

Besides four recognized parties (Republican, Democrat, Green-Rainbow and United Independent Party), there are also 24 political “designations” under which a voter could be registered. Previously, voters registered under a designation could not vote in party primaries. This year, due to a change in law, they can.

Here’s a message from the Elections Division of Secretary Galvin’s office on this subject:

Due to a recent change in law, voters registered with political designations may now register to vote in political parties. If you are registered with a political designation, you may vote in the same way an unenrolled voter would – by choosing a ballot when you check-in at your polling place.

This admittedly only affects a small minority of voters, but if you’re registered with a designation and have previously been excluded from primaries, you’re now included. Have at them!

About a year ago, folks who use the McGrath lot in back of the Worcester Public Library got a shock when they discovered all of the parking meters removed and replaced with numbered signs, which required the parker to remember a number and go pay for their parking at a machine in a corner of the lot. Additionally, several rows of parking were put off-limits to the general public. It was a system that made very little sense, and was described on this blog in detail.

There was widespread confusion about the new system; within a few months, some of the flimsy number signs were broken off, and it beggars the imagination to believe that revenue has been any better since the new system was put in place.

The latest “improvement” to the system involves removing most of the number signs. You can now park in front of a metal pole with a wooden block on it:

Your choice — top-mounted block or mid-level block.

…or a plastic post, either straight or bent:

There are a few numbered signs left, on which you can post your pleas for help:

“Please someone hav already paid for this lot. Thank you.”

…or you could park in front of an empty sign holder:

Whichever spot you pick, you’ll want to bring some tools to figure out your spot number. An ice pick would have been handy last week, a snow shovel the week before. Today you only needed a broom to sweep away the sand off the number painted on the pavement.

Remember not to park in the green section, which is usually mostly empty:

Don’t look for any clarity when you reach the pay machines — all of the helpful instructions and lot diagrams have been removed from the machines.

Despite all of this city-generated confusion, we saw a uniformed employee out ticketing cars on the morning these photos were taken.

It seems that if there’s a wrong way to do something, Worcester will find that way, and come up with a method to make it even more wrong.